Talk:Eve Online/Archive 3

New changes
Okay, I would like to change the cost section so that it only has two paragraphs. The two sections I took out just seem like they are thrown in. Personally, I think we don't need the two parts that were added back. Also, here is the thing with the external links. You have to remember that this isn't meant to be a player guide. This article is meant to be an informative description of the game. That was my reasoning behind taking out the EVE-search link; it only pertains to people that altrady play the game. I will wait to remove the link again until we have discussed it though. --Xander the Potato Vanquisher 13:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I reverted to the last edit by me because there was still garble in the article from the Google bar problems. I redid your references section (the stuff that survived the google garble, at least). Googlebar problems seem to be common -- maybe worth not using for now?
 * I think the two parts in the cost section are very worthwhile. The usefulness of the entire Cost section is really to answer the question: What's the cost to try or play this game? The availability of 1) a free trial and 2) a downloadable game (no purchase necessary etc.) seem very relevant to this point. It's also very useful. The free trial link isn't easily found (if there at all?) on the official site, aside from the Buddy Program which requires an existing player to invite you. I myself, and a couple others I've chatted with, joined EVE, based on this article and the information provided in the cost section (including the trial link). Moreover I don't really see a reason for this information not to be in the section.
 * As for the eve-search link, here's what I'm thinking. The forums provide probably the best insight into the what the general community of the game is (aside from playing it). It's also the place where questions about the nature of the game are answered. A person who doesn't play the game yet can't post their questions, leaving them to look at existing posts. Being able to search the forums helps a lot. That said, I could probably go either way on this one. If it's felt that the forums community isn't really relevant, then I also wonder if all the foreign language fansites are worth keeping, as for most of them their primary function seems to be their forums. --Battlehamster 15:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * As for the eve-search link, here's what I'm thinking. The forums provide probably the best insight into the what the general community of the game is (aside from playing it). It's also the place where questions about the nature of the game are answered. A person who doesn't play the game yet can't post their questions, leaving them to look at existing posts. Being able to search the forums helps a lot. That said, I could probably go either way on this one. If it's felt that the forums community isn't really relevant, then I also wonder if all the foreign language fansites are worth keeping, as for most of them their primary function seems to be their forums. --Battlehamster 15:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * As for the eve-search link, here's what I'm thinking. The forums provide probably the best insight into the what the general community of the game is (aside from playing it). It's also the place where questions about the nature of the game are answered. A person who doesn't play the game yet can't post their questions, leaving them to look at existing posts. Being able to search the forums helps a lot. That said, I could probably go either way on this one. If it's felt that the forums community isn't really relevant, then I also wonder if all the foreign language fansites are worth keeping, as for most of them their primary function seems to be their forums. --Battlehamster 15:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that the content of the cost section is important. What I am saying is that we need to figure out how to integrate those statements into the paragraphs because they break up the article. I just don't know how to do it at the moment.


 * You bring up good points with the link arguments. I would like to see the links thinned out because that is one of our major issues. Not many good articles have as many outward links as this one does. I was trying to find a way to combine a lot of the commnunity sites into one set of links, but I don't know. Your points are taken though. I would just ask that we try to rewrite the cost section into better copy and that we work on the External Links --Xander the Potato Vanquisher 14:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, okay. I agree it could use better copy. I'd just prefer the link stay while we figure it out. I'll think about how to rewrite that section.


 * We may be able to thin out all the foreign language community sites by just linking to EVE's community page http://www.eve-online.com/community/fansites.asp which seems to be roughly the same collection of foreign language sites. --Battlehamster 20:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I like the idea of the combat photo. I think we could probably find a better screenshot though. The current one, while interesting, has a lot of things overlapping each other. A person who hasn't played may have difficulty telling the ship from the station, etc. A simpler photo where one can see the player clearly, and perhaps at least one enemy (near enough to be displayed as a ship and not a HUD icon) would probably be better. I'll keep an eye out for something. --Battlehamster 20:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Link for "The Great Scam" story
Wirm, a fan of "The Great Scam" story by Nightfreeze, registered thegreatscam.com, putting the full content of the original story on that site. The new link contains a short parody by a different author (RolandTower) than the original story, that as I understand it appeared in the original thread on the somethingawful forums. The parody is a small addition (374 words vs 15139 in the Nightfreeze story). The current link is to http://static.circa1984.com/the-big-scam.html which is hosted by an unknown source and is the first google link for "the great scam".

I don't particularly care where we link to for the story, and some of my concerns below may sound a bit nitpicky, but that's because I think the previous link was fairly ideal. In order to change the link I would like to see the new link be at least as useful, readable and direct, while adding something useful.

My main concerns about the new link are:
 * The intro text/page is unnecessary. It's just keeping me from the story. The story introduces itself quite well. At most a "originally copied from " line at the top of the story might be appropriate.
 * The text is broken up into 14 pages (plus the intro page), based on the original 13 parts in the original link. This introduces unnecessary clicking and just breaks up the story. The original story is long, but being plaintext, loads quickly.
 * The text is channeled down a narrow section, rather than flowing to the width of user's browser window. Reflowing is helpful for a long read.
 * The story is no longer easily printable.

Of course all of these things could be addressed by of the owner new link, in which case it'd just be a question of whether the parody by the second author is worth changing for.

Comments please.

--Battlehamster 04:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The user has yet to respond to any of the concerns regarding the link change (I posted a note pointing here on his/her talk page), so I've reverted the link to the original. --Battlehamster 01:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Suggested Changes

 * The small fee to activate your account is $20
 * Possibly note that although there are no shards or instances that standard market transactions are limited to your current region
 * Definition of Stabs... are there T2 Stabs out ATM? If so this def could be revised(who would pay for a T2 stab)


 * By all means add the fee (Euros too) and fiddle with the stabiliser definition if correct (I haven't seen standard T2 stabs). With the shards thing... standard transactions are limited, but this is not a limitation of the game - it's a deliberate feature. Also escrow acts as a rare items market and streches across the whole of EVE. Presumably other MMORPG have no equivalent linking their shards? Wiki-Ed 15:30, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * No there is no other MMORPG with well linked shards. My understanding was each diffrent region was a diffrent server and that is why there was a limitation.  I very well could be wrong.  The escrow is definatly a way to overcome this and basically brings it to a seamless world.


 * Mhm, well when you put up sell/buy orders they are limited to the region you are in atm, but the actual transaction can take place wherever you are in EVE. Example: Region A has sell order, region B has buy order. Players can buy from you in region A and sell to you in region B while you are located in region C. "Each region has its own independent market system which players can put Sell Orders and Buy Orders with limited visibility to their region, although the actual transaction can take place in different region at a different time", rather than just saying standard market transactions are [simply] limited in your current region. ;P And the escrow system just doesn't care about all that ;) Oh and also, including the fee is a must imo -Gussi 18:03, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * So in other words each regions market is completley isolated from each other. Which is what I said.  Yeah you can have buy and sell orders in every region, but I think it has value to mention that these dont overlap.  It is probably the only seam you can see in eve, but it is there.--TonFTP 20:32, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually although the markets are intentionally kept separate (this is so that trading can be profitable between regions more than anything else) the servers that EVE runs on (i believe the SOL layer has 63 dual opteron blades, backed up by SQL servers and RAMSAN solid state storage devices) can run anything from a single solar system, to multiple regions. Larger solar systems such as Jita, will have an entire CPU dedicated to them, whereas in some quiet regions of 0.0 there may be 2 or more regions on a single CPU. The system is dynamic and can balance load as needed. As such the markets being limited to a region has nothing to do with the Cluster archetecture. Most MMOs do not run on a single server, even the WoW and MU Online private servers that have been illegally released are capeable of being run on a small cluster.


 * *The different regions do not run on different servers. The market is sorted by region for gameplay reasons not hardware (to encourage price variation). Alex Bartho 07:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Defintion of POS: Might want to mention different sizes and raw material->simple reaction->advanced reaction->Tech2 component process.--Fenrig 14:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Added the two types of turrets under laser and projectile category, saw you had them for hybrids and thought you would want it balanced. Sorry I didn't consult here first.  New to Wiki =x .  You can take it out if you wish.


 * May want to add Defender and FOF Missiles to the list of missiles, for continuity
 * That is covered on the weapons page I believe. --Xander the Potato Vanquisher 18:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Combat mentions 0.0 before the security section explains the significance, and the no isk/money thing is pure BS in the cost section. I've got spam evemails for buying isk. It's alive and well, if not as common as in other games.
 * Please read the line more carefully. The copy says the game card program allows players that can generate enough in-game ISK to buy the cards to keep up with their subscription. This means they pay for their subscription with ISK, not real money. Also, please remember manners when posting. --Xander the Potato Vanquisher 18:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * There was a paragraph on how GTC sales for ISK somehow artificially bottomed out the market for ISK-for-real-money sales, and how this prevents most/all ISK-for-real-money sales. I couldn't find any evidence or logical reason for why the uncited assertions in the paragraph would be true, as the ISK price of a GTC is set by market supply/demand, so I removed the paragraph. Either way I think it was this paragraph that the original poster is referring it. -- Battlehamster 21:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

New Background
Is it perhaps too wordy? All it is now, is quoting from a part of eve's website that can be added as a link. Bastion 04:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree - I think the backround section is perhaps too long and involved, and disproportionate. Maybe this could get pared down and simplified? (anon)
 * I have cut down this section to a summary of the background to EVE. If readers want to know more than the basics, they can use the link to the full backstory. DJMalone 12:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Eve is entirely on the same server. Shards as such do not exist. Regions denote different areas of racial control and market span.
 * You mean that there is 20,000 people logged onto the same server at the same time, hardware wise? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.240.136.82 (talk • contribs)
 * *Frequently more. —   pd_THOR  undefined | 19:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Kali Pushed Back?
To the best of my knowlage, Kali is still slated for a Q2 release (wither or not this happens is a different story). Granted I wouldn't be to surprised if it was to be released at a later date than this spring, could someone Give a refrence? According to the Eve-Online homepage, under the features section, Kali is still a Q2/2006 Release.

Current information from CCP says 'September 06'. You'll need to look on the latest dev blog to confirm it.


 * Current information says they split Kali in 3 parts with Kali 1 being September (lots of stuff), Kali 2 December (Factional Warfare) and Kali 3 April 2007 (Graphic upgrade) - Official Blog about Kali, gotta register -Shinhan 14:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Community
Hi,

I'd sort of like to add a section on the EvE player community (which will be hard without violating NPOV). Stuff like creating paper ship models, EVE Radio & especially the recent effort at EVE TV may deserve a mention. 213.95.4.106 13:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Pro? Con?
 * Hi.. I think it's a pretty good idea since EVE has one of the most "interactive" communities I've encountered so far. And I don't think it will be a NPOV violation, here is an example from the community section of WoW article. Take care --Xasf 13:14, 19 July 2006 (GMT+3)

Races pages, missing pages, oh my!
I came across a pair of Wiki articles talking about the Amarr and Minmatar, both articles at stub state and needing a major professional overhaul. There's nothing about the Caldari and Gallente yet for some reason.

If I enter EVE-related words in the search box, I can see articles where EVE is mentioned, links pointing to articles that are colored red even though an article already exists and it's just a matter of updating the link to point it to the correct place. There's even one article about words commonly used in EVE Online - I can't find the link for it now but I know it exists somewhere, even though it's written somewhere below on the discussion page that such a thing wasn't supposed to exist.

All in all, it's as if the network of pages about EVE seems uncoordinated. Perhaps we should look into it?

--65.94.64.27 03:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, EVE Online articles in general need a major revision to create cohesion and fill out missing aspects. I'll try to get started with races if I can find the time, but anybody is welcome to give it a try.. Take care --Xasf 08:37, 11 July 2006 (GMT+3)
 * (Barely) created a Caldari article. It is little more than an introductory text and a historical summary at the moment, hence the "under construction" tag. Everybody please feel free to contribute.. Take care --Xasf 13:23, 11 July 2006 (GMT+3)
 * Is it really worthwhile having individual empire pages? If it's going to just be a recreation of what can be found on the Eve website, then I don't see a reason to. On the other hand if we have additional insights into what it's like to actually play the race in the game, then maybe it is worthwhile. The differences may be more significant once the Factional Warfare feature comes in.


 * Also I believe the cause of one of the red links was due to the linked page having been AfD deleted, recreated several times and speedy deleted several times. It looks like Xasf has already taken care of removing the link. -- Battlehamster 17:48, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Gameplay sections
I'm continuing my efforts to categorize and mention various aspects of gameplay. So far we've got some of the basics like advancement, combat and death. I've recently added economy and I'm looking forward to your contributions to that as well. I think we also need a "politics" section that explains basic corporation interaction as well as the bigger picture of player alliances and how they can claim territories and build bases etc. I've no first-hand experience with that stuff (never joined a big corp let alone an alliance), so it would be better if somebody familiar with in-game politics and events writes that section. Any volunteers? :) Take care --Xasf 14:05, 12 July 2006 (GMT+3)


 * 204.76.128.217 already mentioned alliances and conquering systems under "Combat" section, if someone can chip in a little more details about the inner workings of alliances and in-game political environment I think we can form a "Politics" section with that. Take care --Xasf 08:46, 14 July 2006 (GMT+3)


 * That was me. Sorry, I didn't think to look at this page, before I tinkered. The lack of hate and discontent tells me I probably didn't mess up anything too badly. I corrected some information about the market. The vast majority of players use the NPC markets for all transactions, since they perceive it as more reliable than the PC escrow market (though frequently more expensive). I initially purchased my T2 AF (Enyo) and its T2 weapons and mods from the NPC market, and most players never try anything else. So, the sentence that said only basic goods were available was innaccurate. That said, the escrow market is a thriving force, because (notwithstanding the occasional con) it offers good values. Moreover, it generates (IIRC) about 40 percent of all *missions*, especially courier jobs -- although some small fraction of those can turn out to be ambush setups. I'd have to look at CCPs game info to check that 40 percent figure. I put some additional info in the "Death" section, to refer to the loss of cybernetic implants. Those losses make death even more onerous, and mention of implants appeared nowhere else in the page. The combat section's information about the tactics of ship combat were quite accurate, and I just mentioned electronic warfare briefly, as an introduction. The Weapons page covers it more thoroughly, so no need to do more than that on the main page. However, the combat section neglected the level of strategy involved in conflicts in Alliance space. The need for strong logistics, as well as the constraints of jumpgate "geography," makes for fascinating strategic play that's realistic enough to make relevant and useful some aspects of real-life strategic thinking. As a member of a corp which has joined three alliances in the past six months, the last two of which have been at war, I've gotten some insight into that. However, I have avoided involvement in intra-alliance politics between constituent corps, and have not played long enough to get involved in the inter-alliance politics that drives coalitions and sparks wars. As such, I feel I lack the requisite experience to comment confidently. However, I have a degree in Political Science and History, so I can help contribute to such a section, once I learn more. Thanks -- tshiggins 12:46, 14 July 2006 {GMT -7}
 * I'm fairly new to EVE, but is it really appropriate to characterize the regular markets as NPC and the escrow market as PC? I typically do a lot of my buying and selling in the regular markets, and my sales/purchases are often from regular players. Granted I'm not buying really big ticket items, or specialty things like bookmark collections, but even if it's only ore/minerals trading going on, that's a significant part of the market, it seems to me. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. :) As I said, I'm new. --Battlehamster 00:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the term mostly refers to who or what runs those markets. The NPC market is run by the game engine, and the goods there get produced by an algorithm that interacts (remarkably well) with market activity. The escrow market, by comparison, is strictly PC-driven and the game engine has no effect upon it. No algorithm touches it, in any way. tshiggins 20:31, 14 July 2006 {GMT -7}.
 * tshiggins, no you didn't mess anything up so rest easy :) I believe you have more experience and insight into the political aspect of the game than anyone who has come forward so far, so why don't you write a politics section and we'll see how it goes? It doesn't need to be flawless or even complete at the first try, we Wikipedians will eventually shape it towards a better form together. And remember, Wikipedia encourages its users to be bold! :) Take care --Xasf 04:37, 16 July 2006 (GMT+3)
 * While there are trade goods and some t1 items on the market that are NPC, the vast, vast majority is done by players. I can promise you mineral transactions are if nothing else the most numerous, and most likely where most of the money goes, and that's pure PC. I'll take a look at making some sort of politics page, but I'm not familiar with the north beyond generalities. Been involved with the RA conflift for my entire Eve career. First as V, then as V ally, then as anti-V and sort of RA ally. :)Alasseo 01:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Economy is still incorrect. I'll change it back. Alasseo 01:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I cleaned up the "Death" section a bit. That last sentence was nearly paragraph length on its own; I removed "hardcore" and added "severity". Does anyone else think that a bulleted list might be a more succinct way to address EVE's death penalties?

Python?
There should probably be some mention Stackless Python, which most of the game engine is written in. --Piet Delport 07:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd like to mention Stackless Python, as well as the other technologies used, in a History of Development section or something similar. I haven't had time yet to organize such a section, though. --Battlehamster 13:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)